Large Hadron Collider (LHC) creates and traps Antimatter.

big_bang_lhc.jpg
 
Combat squirrel said:
Im not sure I quite agree with this, anti matter and matter reactions are the most energetic in the known universe, far surpassing nuclear reactions, im going to read up on this and get back to the thread, if thats the case creating this particle of anti matter should have massively drained energy from multiple nuclear reactors? it no makes sense.
Click to expand...

Better believe it - Tefal's dead right :). The difference with nuclear is we dont have to create the nuclear fuel in the first place from pure energy - we dig it up. If I recall from reading an interview with a CERN guy a while ago, the current process requires in the region of billions of times more energy to create the antimatter than is released in its annihilation. So yeah - pretty big electricity bill for the LHC - why does that make no sense?

I don't think creating anti matter itself is draining, only colliding matter at massive energies which I understand to be the only way to create explosions in particle reactors large enough to 'pop' an antimatter into existence.
Click to expand...

If you have a method of creating anti-matter without the big collider, good for you! I congratulate you on your future Nobel Prize :). However, please note that even if you could literally command some energy to convert itself into anti-matter, you would still get no more than that original amount of energy back in its annihilation - so break even at best (well not quite as Tefal points out you also have the energy from the matter, but that's academic as you can't simply command the creation of anti-matter! - see above for current (in)efficiency of the process).
 
Tefal said:
yes but you have to make the antimatter first which takes huge amounts of energy, then store it which also takes energy.

You could whoever use it for extremely energy dense fuel.

So you could say make it in huge land facilities using large conventional power plants to power submarines or spaceships (if you can store it for a long time and the reactor is small enoguh to make sense.


Although if both the antimatter particle and it's mater counter part are converted 100% into energy.

You only need to make sure the process you make and store antimatter is less than that total energy so say it could take 150% of the energy release by the antimatter particle to make, but you'll still get 50% of the energy from the matter particle destroyed as "profit".

which could mean you could make a energy profitable antimatter matter power plant but i don't think you're going to see the production becoming that efficient.
Click to expand...

The problem is thou that even if at some point we can build a viable matter/anti-matter reactor, we still have no method of drawing power directly from the reaction. It would still basically produce heat, which makes steam to power a turbine. It might be damned efficient at it compared to a nuclear reactor but it would still be ponderous steam based technology.
 
Bulldog14 said:
The problem is thou that even if at some point we can build a viable matter/anti-matter reactor, we still have no method of drawing power directly from the reaction. It would still basically produce heat, which makes steam to power a turbine. It might be damned efficient at it compared to a nuclear reactor but it would still be ponderous steam based technology.
Click to expand...

Why does that matter? Isn't the electricity generated from the steam turbine the important thing?
 
liampope said:
If I recall from reading an interview with a CERN guy a while ago, the current process requires in the region of billions of times more energy to create the antimatter than is released in its annihilation.
Click to expand...

edscdk said:
you still needs kilo's / tonnes of the stuff to make it to the nearest star....

the odd particle is of no use... its not even going to make a noticable explosion.
Click to expand...

But now we have found anti-matter naturally trapped in the earth's magnetic fields, people are exploring the idea of using these to fuel future rockets
 
Last edited:
aardvark said:
ermm, well no - thats impossible.
Click to expand...

Spot the person who knows nothing about physics.

Anti matter is present in everyday life.

What do you think a PET scanner uses?

Its just we are inefficient at making it, but it exists in nature too, in vast quantities just outside a certain part of space that surrounds Earth.
 
What's the benifits of trapping anti-matter? I'm not exactly a scientist, but it all fascinates me, and I was wondering if there's anything we can actually do with anti-matter or is it more of a "we just can" situation?

If you're going to call me dumb please do so before you answer my question, thanks :)
 
aardvark said:
yes but by definition you cannot get more energy out than you put in - the energy it takes to make antimatter can't be less than the energy released when it annihilates, that would be creating energy from nothing.
Click to expand...

If it's impossible to create energy from nothing then how does the universe exist?

Either it's possible to create energy from nothing or the universe/energy has always existed somehow.
 
Radiation said:
If it's impossible to create energy from nothing then how does the universe exist?

Either it's possible to create energy from nothing or the universe/energy has always existed somehow.
Click to expand...

As far as we know its imposible to create energy from nothing in this part of the universe, for all we know the law could be totally different elsewwhere. Just saying.
 
I think it's a load of rubbish.

1. It's impossible to harness anti-matter, even if we could it would disappear in a billionth of a second.

2. 1 gram of anti-matter if it where to come into contact with matter would create more energy than the Russian Tsar nuclear bomb.

3. Although the above in number 2 is true, it would take longer than the existence of the universe to create 1g of anti-matter.


BBC Horizon is where it's at.
 
Last edited:
I'm well aware anti-matter exists in our planets magnetic field, but we just don't have the technology nor understanding of it to ever attempt to have a 'look' at it, never mind harness the thing.
We're probably talking a few centuries away from being able to do so, like the year 3000 or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom